Charles Plumier's drawings of American plants and the nomenclature of early Caribbean Aristolochia species (Aristolochiaceae)

Abstract

Summary Rankin Rodríguez, R. & Greuter, W.: Charles Plumier's drawings of American plants and the nomenclature of early Caribbean Aristolochia species (Aristolochiaceae). ‐‐ Taxon 48: 677‐688. 1999. – ISSN 0040‐0262. Among the 1657 mostly unpublished drawings of Caribbean plants made by Charles Plumier between 1689 and 1697, 6 concern species of Aristolochia. All have served, either in original (kept in the Central Library of the National Museum of Natural History in Paris) or in copy (from the series drawn for Boerhaave in 1733 and studied in 1738 by Linnaeus), or as published plates base on either set, or by an associated description, as the main basis for 7 heterotypic binomials referring to 6 species. Having studied the original drawings and Plumier's correlated manuscript notes in Paris as well as the 4 extant Boerhaave copies and all relevant literature, the authors critically review the typification and application of the binomials concerned, designating lecto‐ or neotypes where needed and epitypes in most cases. Current usage of names is maintained with two exceptions. The name A. bilabiata has, since 1966, been misapplied to the species that was previously and correctly known as A. oblongata, and should therefore now be rejected as a confused name (rather than being adopted in the sense of its type, displacing A. chasmema to designate a rare endemic of Haiti, Hispaniola). A. punctata, so far considered a doubtful name, is synonymous with A. fuertesii and must be adopted in its stead for another seldom collected endemic of Hispaniola.

Typification of Adanson's generic name Pacoseroca (Zingiberaceae) and its implications

“…These two elements had previously been cited in the protologue of two names published by Linnaeus (1753), the former under Amomum cardamomum L. and the latter under Alpinia racemosa L. However, both of these Linnaean names included other elements, from which their types were later selected (for typification of Al. racemosa , see Gagnepain, 1903; Rodríguez & Greuter, 1999; and Moroni & al., 2018, 2021; for typification of Am. cardamomum , see Burkill, 1930; Burtt & Smith, 1972: 182; and Nicolson & al., 1988).…”

A framework for untangling Linnaean names based on Plumier’s Nova plantarum americanarum genera: Revised typification of Duranta erecta

“…It is also worth mentioning that the Boerhaave's trace proves that Burman's plate contains three errors made by Burman: (1) a fruit in the upper portion of the infrutescence was replaced by a flower, (2) pistils were depicted as exserted, and (3) fruiting-calyces were sketched as free at the apex. Such inaccuracies, which Burman had in his plates, have already been reported (Urban, 1920;Rankin Rodríguez & Greuter, 1999), Thus, even though Munir asserted that Caro's choice of lectotype was a mistake because the plate does not comprise original material, he also failed to distinguish the pertinent element among the material held in Groningen.…”

“…In 1733, under the supervision of the French botanist S. Vaillant, the Royal painter C. Aubriet produced a set of 508 tracings from Plumier's original drawings for the Dutch botanist H. Boerhaave, which is known as the "Codex Boerhaavianus". This work is currently preserved in the Library of the Rijksuniversiteit in Groningen, The Netherlands, and has been discussed by several authors (Polhill & Stearn, 1976;Golding, 1980;Barrie & al., 1991;Bittrich & Stevens, 1998;Rankin Rodríguez & Greuter, 1999) as the source from which Linnaeus outlined the Caribbean plant diversity that Plumier had previously studied.…”

<p><strong>Studies in <em>Aristolochia</em> (Aristolochiaceae) of Hispaniola</strong></p>

“…An examination of herbarium specimens from A, GH, JBSD, NY, US, and USD (herbarium acronyms cited according to Thiers, continuously updated), filed under Aristolochia bilobata, as well as a search of images on the Internet under "Aristolochia bilobata", revealed a mixture of A. adiastola, A. bilobata, and several undescribed species. This confusion can be traced back to the fact that A. bilobata was thought not to have any close relatives (Rankin and Greuter 1999) and that "while this species was frequently collected without flowers or fruits, it could be readily identified by the curious bilobate leaves" (Pfeifer 1966). Following these criteria, all plants from Hispaniola bearing bilobate leaves were at first identified, albeit often incorrectly, as A. bilobata.…”

“…According to Rankin and Greuter (1999) and Marión (2011: 77), this species can be found in St. Thomas, Virgin Islands, yet it was not cited by Acevedo 2005, who has not encountered any specimens of this species from the Virgin Islands (Personal communication to GAR-G, 2017).…”